CSO sues Amaechi, Malami, BPP over appointment Of Cargo tracking system operator




Rotimi Amaechi

The Minister of Transport, Attorney-General of the Federation and Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) have been dragged before a Federal High Court in Abuja, over the appointment of International Cargo Tracking System (ICTN) operators.

Two firms, Medtech Scientific Limited and Rozi International Nigeria Limited were appointed as the ICTN

Advocacy For Social and Economic Rights (CASER), a civil society organisation, Incorporated Trustees of Citizens in a suit dated December 13, 2021, prayed the court for an order restraining the minister of transport from appointing the firms as operators of CITN.

The minister, federal ministry of transport, the Bureau of Public Procurement,the attorney general of the federation
Medtech Scientific limited, and Rozi International Nigeria limited are the 1st to 5th respondents in the matter.

In a motion on notice filed on behalf of the plaintiff, through their counsel, Abdulhakeem U. Mustapha, the plaintiff prayed the court for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st Defendant; either by itself, servants, agents, privies or through any person or persons howsoever described or termed from appointing the 4th and 5th Defendants as the operators of ICTN in Nigeria, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive Suit.

He also prayed the court for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 2nd Defendant; either by itself, servants, agents, privies or through any person or persons howsoever described or termed from giving further approvals and waivers to the 1st Defendant in the planned appointment of the 4th and 5th defendants as the operators ICTN in Nigeria pending the hearing and determination of the substantive Suit.

He prayed the court for the following orders: An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 4th and 5th Defendants; either by themselves, servants, agents, privies or through any person or persons howsoever described or termed from parading themselves or functioning as the operators of the ICTN in Nigeria, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive Suit.

An order of interlocutory injunction restraining all the Defendants; either by themselves or through their officials or agents or other person or persons howsoever from taking any further steps towards nominating any company or entity to be operators of the ICTN in Nigeria pending the hearing and determination of the substantive Suit.

He said the 1st Defendant (transport minister) is set to approve and complete the appointment of the 4th and 5th Defendants (the firms) as the operators of the ICTN in Nigeria without following the provisions the Public Procurement Act and other extant laws in the country.

According to the senior advocate in the suit, the said ICTN involves the tracking of goods and services from their loading ports to Nigeria and same has a lot of security and economic implications for the country.

”The 1st Defendant has already secured the approvals for the said appointment and is now set to appoint the 4th and 5th Defendants notwithstanding the security and economic implications for the country.

”This honourable court has the jurisdiction and powers to stop the appointment of the 4th and 5th Defendants as the operators of the (ICTN) in Nigeria and to restrain them from parading themselves as such pending the hearing and determination of the substantive action”, he said in the motion on notice.

In the affidavit in support of the motion on notice, deposed to by Mr. Frank Tietie the plaintiff said, ”I know as a fact that a proper implementation of the ICTN will be of immense economic and security benefits including real time information on movement of goods across border and intelligence on shipments and enhancing control measures on illegal importation of items detrimental to national security.

”In order to implement the ICTN it is the requirement of the relevant laws that the 1st Defendant will, after following due procurement process, appoint competent companies that will handle the project in conjunction with relevant agencies.

”In a bid to reintroduce and commence the process of implementing the ICTN in Nigeria, Mr. President, vide his letter dated 3rd of August, 2020 approved that a new process for the selection of credible agents to implement the ICTN scheme be commenced and directed that upon completion of the procurement process, the 1st defendant should present a minimum 3 and a maximum of 5 eligible companies for consideration and approval as agent/partners to implement the ICTN scheme. A copy of the said letter of 3rd August, 2020 is hereby attached and marked as Exhibit CASER- 3.

”I know as a fact that by its letter dated 11th September, 2020, the 1st Defendant’s ministry requested the 2nd Defendant to issue Due Process ‘No Objection’ to enable the 1st Defendant Ministry adopt Selective Tendering Method for the engagement of a new agent/partners to implement the ICTN scheme in Nigeria.

”Further to above, the 2nd Defendant by its letter dated 22nd October, 2020 declined to grant “No objection” to the 1st Defendant’s request for Selective Tendering Method but rather stated that it could grant Due Process “No Objection” to the 1st Defendant to adopt International Competitive Bidding based on surround issues. The 2nd Defendant stated at paragraph 8 and 9 thus:

”in view of the foregoing, Due Process “No Objection” cannot be granted to the Federal Ministry of Transport to adopt Selective Tendering Method for the engagement of a new firm to implement the International Cargo Tracking Note (ICTN) scheme in Nigeria

”I know as a fact that a proper implementation of the ICTN will be of immense economic and security benefits including real time information on movement of goods across border and intelligence on shipments and enhancing control measures on illegal importation of items detrimental to national security.

”In order to implement the ICTN it is the requirement of the relevant laws that the 1st Defendant will, after following due procurement process, appoint competent companies that will handle the project in conjunction with relevant agencies.

”In a bid to reintroduce and commence the process of implementing the ICTN in Nigeria, Mr. President, vide his letter dated 3rd of August, 2020 approved that a new process for the selection of credible agents to implement the ICTN scheme be commenced and directed that upon completion of the procurement process, the 1st defendant should present a minimum 3 and a maximum of 5 eligible companies for consideration and approval as agent/partners to implement the ICTN scheme. A copy of the said letter of 3rd August, 2020 is hereby attached and marked as Exhibit CASER- 3.

”I know as a fact that by its letter dated 11th September, 2020, the 1st Defendant’s ministry requested the 2nd Defendant to issue Due Process ‘No Objection’ to enable the 1st Defendant Ministry adopt Selective Tendering Method for the engagement of a new agent/partners to implement the ICTN scheme in Nigeria.

”Further to above, the 2nd Defendant by its letter dated 22nd October, 2020 declined to grant “No objection” to the 1st Defendant’s request for Selective Tendering Method but rather stated that it could grant Due Process “No Objection” to the 1st Defendant to adopt International Competitive Bidding based on surround issues. The 2nd Defendant stated at paragraph 8 and 9 thus:

”in view of the foregoing, Due Process “No Objection” cannot be granted to the Federal Ministry of Transport to adopt Selective Tendering Method for the engagement of a new firm to implement the International Cargo Tracking Note (ICTN) scheme in Nigeria.

”I know as a fact that a proper implementation of the ICTN will be of immense economic and security benefits including real time information on movement of goods across border and intelligence on shipments and enhancing control measures on illegal importation of items detrimental to national security.

”In order to implement the ICTN it is the requirement of the relevant laws that the 1st Defendant will, after following due procurement process, appoint competent companies that will handle the project in conjunction with relevant agencies.

”In a bid to reintroduce and commence the process of implementing the ICTN in Nigeria, Mr. President, vide his letter dated 3rd of August, 2020 approved that a new process for the selection of credible agents to implement the ICTN scheme be commenced and directed that upon completion of the procurement process, the 1st defendant should present a minimum 3 and a maximum of 5 eligible companies for consideration and approval as agent/partners to implement the ICTN scheme. A copy of the said letter of 3rd August, 2020 is hereby attached and marked as Exhibit CASER- 3.

”I know as a fact that by its letter dated 11th September, 2020, the 1st Defendant’s ministry requested the 2nd Defendant to issue Due Process ‘No Objection’ to enable the 1st Defendant Ministry adopt Selective Tendering Method for the engagement of a new agent/partners to implement the ICTN scheme in Nigeria.

”Further to above, the 2nd Defendant by its letter dated 22nd October, 2020 declined to grant “No objection” to the 1st Defendant’s request for Selective Tendering Method but rather stated that it could grant Due Process “No Objection” to the 1st Defendant to adopt International Competitive Bidding based on surround issues. The 2nd Defendant stated at paragraph 8 and 9 thus:

”in view of the foregoing, Due Process “No Objection” cannot be granted to the Federal Ministry of Transport to adopt Selective Tendering Method for the engagement of a new firm to implement the International Cargo Tracking Note (ICTN) scheme in Nigeria.”

Related content you may like